[PATCH] Loop Vectorizer doesn't use %zmm registers on targets supporting AVX512.

[Demikhovsky, Elena]

I've added most of AVX-512 instructions to LLVM. The set is full enough to enable vectorization.
Zinovy works on vectorizer now.

-  Elena


-----Original Message-----
From: Nadav Rotem [mailto:nrotem at apple.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2014 07:21
To: zinovy.nis at gmail.com
Cc: reviews+D3078+public+24d708f76caeed7c at llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com; Demikhovsky, Elena; rob.khasanov at gmail.com; avolkov.intel at gmail.com; llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net; aschwaighofer at apple.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Loop Vectorizer doesn't use %zmm registers on targets supporting AVX512.

Elena, is the AVX512 support in LLVM mature enough to enable vectorization by default ?

On Mar 16, 2014, at 3:37 AM, zinovy.nis at gmail.com wrote:

> I have no real avx512 architecture at hands.
> But I believe that using wider vectors is better than using shorter ones in this case.
> BTW, the KNL cost model in LLVM was taken from the Haswell cost model (see TODOs in x86.td), so it can't be very accurate for KNL.
> 
> -----Исходное сообщение----- From: Arnold Schwaighofer
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 8:08 PM
> To: elena.demikhovsky at intel.com ; rob.khasanov at gmail.com ; avolkov.intel at gmail.com ; nrotem at apple.com ; zinovy.nis at gmail.com
> Cc: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu ; Andrea_DiBiagio at sn.scee.net ; aschwaighofer at apple.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Loop Vectorizer doesn't use %zmm registers on targets supporting AVX512.
> 
> 
> Curious, did you test whether the cost model works reasonably well across the test-suite with this turned on? Are there any/many major regressions with this patch applied vs without on an avx512 architecture?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Arnold
> 
> 
> ================
> Comment at: test/CodeGen/X86/avx512-vectorizer.ll:8
> @@ +7,3 @@
> +
> +define void @foo(float* noalias nocapture readonly %a, float* noalias nocapture readonly %b, float* noalias nocapture %c, i32 %n) #0 {
> +entry:
> ----------------
> You could remove the no capture and readonly attributes. They are not needed for this test case.
> 
> I am also surprised that llvm accepts dangling function attributes ("#0”) but it does :).
> 
> 
> http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D3078 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.